Download
1 / 19
200 likes | 216 Views
Analyzing the long-term enemy, significance of 9/11, Clash of Civilizations theory, Islam and the West debate, critiquing Clash of Civilizations, understanding the End of History thesis, relations to 9/11, WWIV concept, challenges to Liberal Democracy, and the existential threat of terrorism.
E N D
Debating the war on terror Theoretical Explanations
Terror as existential threat The war on terror has prompted an academic and policy debate which considers; • The long term enemy of the West • The significance of 9/11 • How to think about the war on terror
The Clash of Civilisations • Proposed by Samuel P. Huntingdon in 1997 this theory predates 9/11 and the War on Terror. • It was part of a search by Security Studies scholars to identify the next long term threat to the West after the Cold War. • It maintains that nations will be come more divided culturally as identity politics become more important in global relations. • Is very specific about the nature of where the threat will most likely come from.
Islam and the West • Huntingdon argues that there are many cultures present in the world but that Islam is the troublesome one. • He argues it encourages a loyalty to the religion that supplants the nation state, is hostile towards ideas such as democracy, liberty, individualism and universal human rights. • This makes it incompatible with Western values and he argues it should be avoided at all costs.
Clash of Civilisations & 9/11 • Huntingdon's work caused a furious debate in the academic world from 1997 onwards but 9/11 made the book a best seller. • It appears to explain Radical Islam’s approach to the West and offers us a paradigm through which groups such as AQ and ISIS make sense. • Osama bin Laden’s rhetoric fully supported the idea of a clash of civilisations and he often portrayed Islam as being at war with the West.
ISIS and Clash of Civilisations • AQ attempted to portray it’s conflict as a clash of civilisations and wanted the Muslim world to see itself at war with the West. • ISIS has been much more successful in promoting this view and has successfully convinced large numbers of Muslims in the West (foreign fighters) and the East (local support). • Is it beneficial to continue this view or does it play into the hands of ISIS?
Criticisms of the Clash of Civilisations • Might explain Radical Islam’s approach to the West but does not explain the West’s approach to Islam – especially the protection of Muslims in Bosnia 1995 & Kosovo 1999. • Assumes that Democracy and Universal Rights do not appeal to Islamic citizens – this does not fit with Arab Spring. • Also portrays Islam as homogenous and does not recognise the enmity between Sunni and Shia branches.
The End of history • Huntingdon’s work had partly been prompted as a response to Francis Fukuyama’s End of History thesis, proposed in 1992. • Fukuyama argued that with the fall of the Soviet Union signalled the triumph of Liberal Democracy and Capitalism. • This meant the end of history as history is the story of the progress of society towards an ideal form of Government. • Liberal Democracy equals Peace, Order and Prosperity.
Fukuyama and 9/11 • 9/11 appears to undermine the end of history idea as Radical Islam does not seek liberal democracy or capitalism. • Arguable that AQ and ISIS represent a backlash against liberal democracy. • Even the Arab Spring bought anti-democratic organisations like the Muslim Brotherhood to power.
WWIV and Norman Podhoretz • Originally a left wing intellectual Podhoretz broke ranks and moved across to the Right. • He has argued that the War on Terror should be thought of in terms of epochal challenges to Liberal Democracy. • The previous challenges have all been totalitarian and are known as the World Wars; WWI - Centre Right/ WWII – Far Right/ WWIII (Cold War) – Far Left.
War on Terror as WWIV • WWIV started on 9/11 when Islamo-facism attacked the U.S. but the stage was set for the conflict over the preceding 20 years. • This war may be against Islamo-facism but it is essentially the same enemy faced in the past 3 world wars. • Much of the problem comes from the reluctance of presidents pre- George W. Bush to use military force to deal with terrorists.
Terrorism as Existential Threat • This conflict squarely casts America as fighting for freedom, liberty and tolerance. • It is essential to the progress of the world that WWIV is an American victory as failure will see moral relativism become the norm. • America and The West MUST be willing to stand up for their values and go the distance – 40/50 years worth.
Issues with WWIV • Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya all prove that whilst America can defeat groups militarily it does not have the vision or political will to stay. • If the WWIV narrative is adopted then we essentially adopt CoC and have to face uncomfortable discussions about the role of Islam. • Would also entail facing up to difficult truths around Middle Eastern ‘allies’ like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt.
Gerges • Argued in his book The Rise and Fall of Al Qaeda that the War on Terror has been a miscalculation by the USA. • The U.S. is actually weaker militarily and internationally after Afghanistan and Iraq. • The War on Terror is based on the wrong assumption that the USA and The West are under continual attack from Radical Islam.
Bin Laden’s Gamble • Bin Laden was attempting to have the US lash out against the Umma and thus facilitate the Clash of Civilisations. • Outraged at this, the world’s Muslims would rise up and help AQ defeat America. • Despite Muslim politics remaining deeply anti-American this has not happened and bin Laden’s gamble has failed.
Failure of ‘bin Ladenism’ • 40% of the World’s Muslims did support bin Laden’s criticisms of America but actively rejected his terrorist methods. • It was only the apathy, not support, of this silent majority which allowed AQ to shape the political discourse present within Islam. • Despite having supported the views of bin Ladenism out of anger the categorical military defeat in Afghan has led to a realisation it was empty rhetoric.
Iraq as a step backwards? • Gerges arguments hold true up until the invasion of Iraq as the tightly identified goals enabled the Muslim world to accept the GWOT. • Invading Iraq widened the scope of the GWOT and has unleashed chaos in the region. • Lack of clear goals has played into the hands of Islamist propagandists and ceded the narrative to them.
Chomsky – Another alternative • Perhaps the War on Terror is an neo-Imperial programme designed to further American political interests. • By invading the Middle East America gains physical and strategic control over the energy supplies resident there. • The GWOT has failed to achieve its most basic requirement as it has increased the number of terrorist attacks.
Deep state • This failed GWOT serves political purpose in that it allows for a continued rhetoric of threat to be used. • In turn this justifies increased defence spending, which sends vast amounts of money directly into multi-national corporations which then endorse future politicians. • This ‘deep state’ then has the ability to further promote their desired aims irrespective of the wishes of the populace.
